Columns

The Tesla CEO highlights outdated methods of manipulation and points to new trends in the age of digital communication.

In a recent tweet, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, a well-known critic of traditional media, accused legacy media of using "boring propaganda." This bold statement begs the question: What is boring propaganda, and how does it contrast with the more modern forms of persuasion that dominate the digital age? To understand this, we can look to the work of philosopher and political activist Noam Chomsky, specifically his "propaganda model," as a framework for analysing media manipulation. 

Noam Chomsky's propaganda model, as presented in the book "Manufacturing Consent," co-authored with Edward S. Herman, argues that mainstream media outlets are beholden to the interests of the elite and powerful. These media gatekeepers filter news and information to serve their corporate and political masters, thereby manipulating public opinion to align with their agendas.

According to Chomsky, the media achieves this through a combination of five filters: ownership, advertising, sourcing, flak, and marginalizing dissent. By controlling these factors, the elite can ensure that their narratives are propagated while dissenting voices are marginalized or silenced.

In his tweet, Musk seems to lable legacy media as “boring Propaganda”. He also insinuates that the tactics employed by legacy media, as outlined by Chomsky, are outdated and boring. This could be a critique of their reliance on these methods in a world that has rapidly evolved beyond print and broadcast journalism. It is important to acknowledge that Twitter is a more open and democratic platform compared to traditional media gatekeepers. Musk's individual influence, though significant, might not be directly comparable to the influence of media corporations. However, Musk himself may not be exempt from the model's implications. As a billionaire CEO, Musk holds significant sway over public opinion through his own tweets and media appearances. Additionally, as an influential figure on Twitter, Musk indirectly benefits from the platform's advertising model. This places him in a similar position to the media gatekeepers Chomsky describes, as he too can promote his own interests and those of his companies, shaping the narrative around his projects. 

Twitter engagement with the Chomsky model can be examined through the lens of two filters: flak and marginalizing dissent (formerly known as anti-communism).

In contrast to the old-fashioned methods, non-boring propaganda refers to the more innovative and engaging techniques used to shape public opinion in the digital age. These include:

In response to these challenges, some legacy media outlets have attempted to adapt by incorporating new techniques into their propaganda efforts. For example, they may utilize social media, clickbait headlines, or even influencer partnerships to amplify their message. However, these efforts often pale in comparison to the more organic and engaging strategies employed by independent content creators and digital natives.

 

Elon Musk's criticism of legacy media's "boring propaganda" serves as a reminder that, in the digital age, traditional means of manipulation are losing their effectiveness. While media gatekeepers and the elite may continue to wield significant power, the rise of alternative methods of communication and the democratization of information has the potential to challenge and disrupt their narratives. As the world becomes more connected and digital-savvy, it is crucial to remain vigilant to the ever-evolving tactics of persuasion and manipulation.

While Elon Musk's criticism of legacy media's "boring propaganda" highlights the shortcomings of traditional media manipulation methods, it is important to recognize that even figures like Musk are not entirely immune to Chomsky's propaganda model. As the media landscape evolves, it is crucial to remain vigilant in recognizing the ways in which power and influence can shape the narratives we consume, whether from legacy media or seemingly disruptive voices like Musk's.

Discourse Analysis: Navigating Language, Power, and Society

Discourse analysis is an interdisciplinary domain, traversing the fields of linguistics, sociology, anthropology, and more. It involves examining language use beyond grammatical structures, considering the interplay of linguistic and societal forces. The work of M.A.K. Halliday and Michel Foucault offers contrasting yet complementary perspectives on this complex study.

Halliday's Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) provides a framework for understanding how language functions within context. He hypothesizes that language is a social semiotic that serves three metafunctions: ideational, to express content; interpersonal, to interact; and textual, to create coherent and cohesive communication. His approach aids in interpreting how language varies across different social situations and its role in constructing social relations.

On the contrary, Foucault's discourse theory elevates the concept to an abstract level where power dynamics are inherent. He examines how societal structures shape discourse, which, in turn, shapes knowledge and power relationships. Foucault's analysis explores the historical and institutional practices that frame our perception of reality.

Together, Halliday's and Foucault's theories underscore the significance of context—both the immediate linguistic context and the broader socio-cultural milieu—in analyzing discourse. Their insights reveal that language is not just a means of communication but a tool for constructing and understanding the world. This complex interconnection of language and power shapes our collective reality, influencing everything from daily conversations to the ideologies that govern societies.

Discourse analysis thus opens up an understanding where language serves as a gateway to the invisible networks of power and societal functions, offering a profound knowledge of human interaction and the structures that define our existence.

The Hierarchy of Linguistic Analysis: An Insight into Pragmatics


Language is a complex fabric composed of different elements, each symbolizing a distinct aspect of linguistic research.   The study can be organized into a hierarchical model, which separates different levels starting from basic human sounds to the complex ways we access language in different contexts.   Comprehending this hierarchy is crucial for linguists, language learners, and anybody with a keen interest in the dynamics of human communication. 

The foundation of linguistic structure begins with Phonetics, the study of speech sounds. This moves onto Phonology, examining how sounds function within a particular language. Ascending the hierarchy, we reach Morphology, the analysis of words and their meaningful components, followed by Syntax, the rules that govern sentence structure. Next is Semantics, concerned with the meaning of words and sentences. At the apex of this structure is Pragmatics, the domain that investigates the use of language in context and goes beyond the literal meaning of words.

Pragmatics explores the nuances of language that are not encompassed by vocabulary or grammatical guidelines.   It examines the process of meaning formation in relation to the speaker, the listener, the context, and the communicative intent.   Pragmatics addresses the interaction between linguistic signs and their impact on the participants engaged in the discussion. In English, for example, the phrase "Could you open the window?" is more than a question about the physical ability of the listener. Pragmatically, it is understood as a polite request. The actual meaning relies on the shared understanding between the speaker and the listener about the context and the way language works in polite requests. Turning to Arabic, a language rich in expressions and social protocols, pragmatics plays a crucial role. Consider the phrase هل بإمكانك فتح النافذة؟  Literally means, "Is it possible for you to open the window?" Nevertheless, pragmatically, it is not only a question but a courteous way to ask someone to open the window. The politeness comes from the phrasing, which assumes the action is possible, leaving room for the person to decline if necessary. Another example in Arabic is the use of the word إن شاء الله (Insha'Allah), which translates to "God willing" or "If God wills it." While it can express genuine deference to divine will, pragmatically, it often implies uncertainty or a non-committal stance towards future actions. When someone says سأزورك غدًا إن شاء الله, meaning "I will visit you tomorrow, God willing," it could pragmatically signal that while the speaker has the intention, there is acknowledgment of potential unforeseen circumstances.

The nuances of pragmatics are evident across languages and cultures. It considers the implications of utterances, the presuppositions, and the implicatures. Pragmatics encompasses phenomena such as irony, metaphor, and sarcasm, which rely heavily on the shared knowledge and expectations between communicators.

While the hierarchical model of linguistic analysis lays the groundwork for understanding language structure, pragmatics crowns the discipline with the study of meaning in action. It is an indispensable field for grasping the whole human dimension of our daily communications, providing insight into not just what we say but how and why we say it. Pragmatic competence is crucial in effective communication. It allows us to navigate social interactions and understand jokes, sarcasm, idioms, and cultural references. For language learners, developing pragmatic skills is often more challenging than learning vocabulary or grammar because it requires understanding the social and cultural subtleties of the language.

Pragmatic Competence

Pragmatic competence is the ability to use language effectively in social contexts, understanding both what is said and what is implied. It requires more than just knowledge of vocabulary and grammar; it demands sensitivity to cultural norms, unspoken rules of conversation, and the multiple layers of meaning that words can carry in different situations.

The actual test of pragmatic competence is not just in comprehending the literal meaning of sentences but in navigating the subtleties of indirect requests, humor, politeness, and the varied forms of non-literal language use. For example, knowing when a "yes" actually means "no," or when "maybe" is a polite decline, or why "Can you pass the remote?" is a request rather than a query about someone's ability all illustrate pragmatic understanding.

Pragmatic competence is vital for effective cross-cultural communication. It empowers individuals to build rapport, avoid misunderstandings, and engage fully with others, promoting successful interactions in a globalized world. Whether in formal or informal exchange, pragmatic competence or agility is crucial to understanding and being understood beyond words. Developing pragmatic competence involves learning to interpret intonation, gesture, facial expression, and proximity, as well as the appropriate use of language in diverse social interactions. It is especially challenging in a second language, where the learner must grasp the cultural and contextual cues that native speakers often take for granted.

References  

Smith vs. Clan: How English Work Ethics Forged a Nation

Ever wonder about the origins of common surnames and what they might reveal about cultural values? As someone fascinated by history and sociology, I find the contrast between English surnames like Smith and Scottish clan names absolutely fascinating. That map of the Scots clans really grabbed my attention, sparking curiosity about how England and Scotland surnames differ and what that means for the building of nations. It's interesting to see how in modern times, where social norms shift, England seems to have outpaced Scotland. The English emphasis on labour and craftsmanship paved the way for a great nation, while Scottish conservatism, with its focus on preserving familial and clan identities, presents a different narrative. These naming traditions reflect underlying values that have undoubtedly played a role in how both countries have navigated their paths to nationhood in an era where labour and industry have often been at the forefront of progress.

Let's start with the Scottish clan system. Names like MacGregor, Campbell, and MacKenzie conjure up images of fierce Highland warriors, territorial allegiances, and an intense sense of familial loyalty and kinship. Clans held lands, titles, and engaged in feuds and power struggles - it was all about perpetuating the family line and bloodline connections to soil. Even the legendary film "Braveheart" tapped into this romantic notion of clans over country.

Now look at quintessentially English surnames derived from occupations - Smith obviously being the most ubiquitous. But we also have names ending in "smith" indicating blacksmiths, goldsmiths, silversmiths, and more. These monikers point to an entirely different set of cultural priorities and values.

This contrast is all the more intriguing when you sprinkle in a bit of the old rivalry—a feud as old as the hills themselves. The history between England and Scotland is fraught with battles over power, land, and autonomy, with both sides fiercely defending their rights and ways of life. It's a history marked by the English crown's efforts to subdue the clans and bring Scotland under its rule, with the Scots pushing back, clinging to their clan identities as a source of strength and resistance. Today, we might see this as a symbolic representation of the contrast between individual labour powering a nation's growth, as in England, and the collective identity and conservatism that characterized Scotland, each leaving a distinct mark on the canvas of history.

To me, the proliferation of names like Smith signals an English society that revered skilled labour and specialized craftsmanship vital to economies and nation-building. Smiths produced crucial tools, weapons, and goods that allowed communities to grow and thrive. Their trades and professional guilds created economic foundations and facilitated commerce.

While Scottish clans forged intense familial bonds, the rise of occupational English surnames could be viewed as forging a different path - one intertwined with industrial progress, innovation, and a strong national work ethic. Perhaps this mindset helped pave England's way to future economic and global dominance. This divergence in societal values and structures might be one of the reasons England prevailed over Scotland, shaping a nation where labourism and industrial development led to greater national strength in contrast to the Scottish conservatism focused on clan lineage and territorial allegiance.

Of course, this is simply one theory drawing from linguistic and cultural patterns. The real histories are far more nuanced. But I find it a fascinating lens to ponder the diverging courses of two neighboring nations with such different surnames taking root.

Now, here's the thing - head over to Saudi Arabia, especially the Aseer reigon, and you're in a whole different world of names. If you belong to a tribe, you're carrying something grand - centuries of history and honour. Tribal names are your passport to respect in society, and they can open doors, from business to marriage prospects.

But what if you're a craftsman there, a (صانع)? Well, it's respected, sure - someone's got to make those swords, right? But it doesn't carry the same clout. It suggests you're not from the old tribes, and it can even put a dent in your social status. Imagine being a top-notch swordsmith but not quite fitting into the tribal inner circles or, say, finding it tough to marry into a tribal family because of that title. This stark distinction places craftsmen in a precarious position, at risk of being outcasted or marginalized in social hierarchies that value tribal lineage above vocational skill, highlighting a significant cultural divide in the valuation of work and heritage. Unlike the English 'Smiths,' who played a pivotal and constructive role in nation-building, craftsmen in this context face challenges in achieving comparable recognition and influence.

So, it's cool to have a strong family name, but at the end of the day, it's the hard work and the sweat of the brow - that's what builds nations. Those English smiths weren't just making horseshoes and swords; they were shaping the future, one strike of the hammer at a time. It's a stark contrast, isn't it? In England, being a smith meant you were building the nation, strike by strike. But in Aseer, it's the tribal name that's your ticket to social standing. Makes you think about what really makes a nation, doesn't it? Whether it's the name you're born with or the work you do with your hands, both have their own place in shaping a country's story.

The Dynamics of Recreational Learning and Vocational Training

Saudi students studying abroad, especially in Australia and America, exhibit distinct differences in their adjustment processes, academic experiences, and preferences for selecting a study destination. As someone who has personally navigated the educational landscapes of both Australia and America, my insights into the experiences of Saudi students in these countries are grounded in a wealth of firsthand experience. Having immersed myself in both schooling systems, I have not only observed the academic and cultural adjustments of my peers but have also lived through these transitions, confronting the challenges, and embracing the opportunities that each environment presents. This unique vantage point allows me to offer an educated argument, informed by a rich and nuanced understanding of the disparate educational philosophies, support mechanisms, and adjustment processes in these two distinct academic settings. My analysis, therefore, stems from a deep personal engagement with the realities of international education, equipping me with a comprehensive perspective on the variances and commonalities that characterize the academic journeys of Saudi students abroad.

In both Australia and America, Saudi students encounter challenges related to language and cultural adjustment. In Australia, they struggle with language proficiency and adapting to new educational and cultural environments. These challenges significantly affect their academic performance and cultural adaptation (Alsahafi & Shin, 2017). Similarly, in the United States, Saudi students face language barriers and cultural differences. Additionally, they encounter difficulties in adapting to the American educational system, which necessitates the development of strong personal relationships with faculty members to support their academic journey (Razek & Coyner, 2013).

Concerning academic experiences and support, Saudi students in Australia express satisfaction with their academic performance and the support systems available, indicating successful adjustment to the Australian educational environment (Jameel et al., 2022). In contrast, Saudi students in the United States have reported challenges in feeling comfortable with the educational approach and a need for improved personal relationships with faculty to navigate their academic paths effectively (Sandekian et al., 2015).

Motivation and preferences for choosing a study destination also differ. Saudi students are attracted to Australia due to its perceived safety, tolerance, high-quality educational system, and the relative ease of admission processes (Binsahl et al., 2019). Meanwhile, the decision to study in the United States is often influenced by the global reputation of its institutions and opportunities for cultural and professional exposure.

The distinction between the educational experiences in Australia and America for Saudi students extends to the nature and outcomes of their study programs. In Australia, the educational environment offers a more holistic and research-focused approach. This broad-based educational philosophy aids in the academic adjustment of Saudi students and provides them with diverse options and a comprehensive understanding of their fields of study. The Australian system's emphasis on research and critical thinking skills enables students to explore various academic and professional avenues, potentially leading to a more recreational and exploratory educational experience (Marginson, 2012). Conversely, American institutions often prioritize a more vocational and coursework-driven approach, aiming to equip students with specific skills and knowledge directly applicable to their career paths and aligned with the practical and immediate needs of the job market (Northern et al., 2019). Therefore, while Saudi students in America might receive a more structured and directly career-focused education, their counterparts in Australia may experience broader academic exploration, reflecting the intrinsic differences between the educational philosophies of the two countries.

From the experiences of Saudi students in Australia and America, it is evident that despite shared challenges like language barriers and cultural adaptation, there are pronounced differences in their academic journeys, support mechanisms, and factors influencing their choice of study destination. The academic environment in Australia, with its broader, research-oriented approach, contrasts with the more vocational and targeted curriculum offered by American institutions. Furthermore, the support systems and motivations driving students' choices of where to study also significantly vary between these two nations. These variances highlight the need for educational institutions and policymakers to develop and implement support services and educational programs specifically designed to meet the diverse needs and aspirations of Saudi international students. By recognizing and addressing these distinct requirements, educators and policymakers can enhance the educational experience and success of these students on the global academic stage.

 

References:

- Alsahafi, N., & Shin, S.-C. (2017). Factors Affecting the Academic and Cultural Adjustment of Saudi International Students in Australian Universities. Journal of International Students, 7(1), 53-72. 

- Binsahl, H. M., Chang, S., & Bosua, R. (2019). Saudi female students' motivations to study in Australia: A qualitative study. Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration.

- Jameel, T., Baig, M., Tariq, S., Gazzaz, Z., Butt, N. S., Althagafi, N., Hazazi, E., & Alsayed, R. (2022). Psychosocial, cultural, and academic challenges to Saudi Arabian students in Australia. PLoS ONE, 17. 

- Razek, N., & Coyner, S. (2013). Cultural Impacts on Saudi Students at a Mid-Western American University. The Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 17, 103. 

- Sandekian, R., Weddington, M., Birnbaum, M., & Keen, K. (2015). A Narrative Inquiry Into Academic Experiences of Female Saudi Graduate Students at a Comprehensive Doctoral University. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19, 360-378. 

- Northern, A., & Petrilli, M. (2019). Aligning CTE Courses to Local Labor Markets. The state education standard, 19, 25-29.